IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v40y2008i6p1347-1369.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rescaling Employment Relations: Key Outcomes of Change in the Privatised Rail Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Danny MacKinnon

    (Department of Geography & Environment, School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Elphinstone Road, Aberdeen AB24 3UF, Scotland)

  • Andrew Cumbers

    (Department of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland)

  • Jon Shaw

    (School of Geography, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, England)

Abstract

The past decade has witnessed a revival of interest in the role of labour in political and economic restructuring. Following a period in the 1980s and early 1990s when trade unions and employees were routinely portrayed as passive victims of corporate restructuring, the past ten years have seen a resurgence of work by geographers highlighting the continued agency of labour. Despite this ‘new labour geography’, however, there has been little empirical research examining the uneven development of employment relations at a broad industry level. We address this issue by examining the changing geography of employment regulation in the UK's privatised rail industry. A major shift in the scale at which industrial relations are organised has taken place under privatisation, away from national collective bargaining to a system of localised company bargaining. On the basis of secondary data gathered from industry sources, we provide an initial assessment of key outcomes of employment change in the rail industry. Our analysis indicates that considerable disparities in pay and conditions exist between different groups of workers, companies, and regions, although these are perhaps less extreme than suggested by the unions. In addition, the number of industrial disputes has escalated in the aftermath of privatisation. Moreover, instead of the set piece national strikes that took place in the nationalised industry, the majority of this strike action has been conducted against particular operators at the local and regional scales, reflecting the logic of company-level bargaining. At the same time, the membership of the three main unions has actually increased in recent years against a backdrop of long-term decline, suggesting that the decentralisation of collective bargaining presents unions with opportunities as well as challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Danny MacKinnon & Andrew Cumbers & Jon Shaw, 2008. "Rescaling Employment Relations: Key Outcomes of Change in the Privatised Rail Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(6), pages 1347-1369, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:40:y:2008:i:6:p:1347-1369
    DOI: 10.1068/a39203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a39203
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a39203?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Noel Castree, 2000. "Geographic Scale and Grass-Roots Internationalism: The Liverpool Dock Dispute, 1995–1998," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 272-292, July.
    2. David M. Newbery & Michael G. Pollitt, 1997. "The Restructuring and Privatisation of Britain's CEGB—Was It Worth It?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 269-303, September.
    3. Tim Strangleman, 2004. "Work Identity at the End of the Line?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-51385-3.
    4. Gourvish, Terry, 2004. "British Rail 1974-1997: From Integration to Privatisation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199269099.
    5. Andy Charlwood, 2004. "The New Generation of Trade Union Leaders and Prospects for Union Revitalization," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 42(2), pages 379-397, June.
    6. Graham Haughton & Jamie Peck, 1996. "Geographies of Labour Market Governance," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 319-321.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noriaki Matsushima & Fumitoshi Mizutani, 2014. "How Does Market Size Affect Vertical Structure When Considering Vertical Coordination? Application to the Railway Industry," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 657-676, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Preetum Domah & Michael G. Pollitt, 2001. "The restructuring and privatisation of the electricity distribution and supply businesses in England," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 107-146, March.
    2. Anastassios Gentzoglanis, 2002. "Privatization, Investment and Efficiency in the Telecommunications Industry: Theory and Empirical Evidence from MENA Countries," Working Papers 0230, Economic Research Forum, revised 10 Oct 2002.
    3. Simshauser, Paul, 2024. "On static vs. dynamic line ratings in renewable energy zones," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Marino, Marianna & Parrotta, Pierpaolo & Valletta, Giacomo, 2019. "Electricity (de)regulation and innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 748-758.
    5. Alex Bryson & P Willman, 2007. "Union Organization in Great Britain," CEP Discussion Papers dp0774, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    6. Michael A. Crew & Paul R. Kleindorfer, 2013. "Privatization of postal operators: old arguments and new realities," Chapters, in: Michael A. Crew & Paul R. Kleindorfer (ed.), Reforming the Postal Sector in the Face of Electronic Competition, chapter 1, pages 1-19, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Branston, J. R., 2000. "A counterfactual price analysis of British electricity privatisation," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 31-46, March.
    8. Paul L. Joskow, 2001. "California's Electricity Crisis," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 17(3), pages 365-388.
    9. Zhao, Xiaoli & Ma, Chunbo, 2013. "Deregulation, vertical unbundling and the performance of China's large coal-fired power plants," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 474-483.
    10. Gohdes, Nicholas & Simshauser, Paul & Wilson, Clevo, 2022. "Renewable entry costs, project finance and the role of revenue quality in Australia's National Electricity Market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    11. Schober, Dominik, 2013. "Static vs. dynamic impacts of unbundling: Electricity markets in South America," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-033, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Jacqueline Adelowo & Moritz Bohland, 2022. "Redesigning Automated Market Power Mitigation in Electricity Markets," ifo Working Paper Series 387, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    13. van Damme, E.E.C., 2007. "Liberalising Gambling Markets : Lessons from Network Industries?," Other publications TiSEM 05e5f2b8-a1b5-4638-9827-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Paul Simshauser & Farhad Billimoria & Craig Rogers, 2021. "Optimising VRE plant capacity in Renewable Energy Zones," Working Papers EPRG2121, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    15. Katy Fox-Hodess, 2017. "(Re-)Locating the Local and National in the Global: Multi-Scalar Political Alignment in Transnational European Dockworker Union Campaigns," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 55(3), pages 626-647, September.
    16. Thomas Weyman-Jones, 2001. "Yardstick and incentive issues in UK electricity distribution price controls," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 233-247, June.
    17. Charalampos Karagiannakis & Elena Ketteni & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Panos Pashardes, 2014. "Public vs Private: Electricity and Telecommunications in Europe," Cyprus Economic Policy Review, University of Cyprus, Economics Research Centre, vol. 8(1), pages 53-70, June.
    18. Simshauser, P., 2020. "Merchant utilities and boundaries of the firm: vertical integration in energy-only markets," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2039, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    19. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2007. "Regulatory reform in Turkish energy industry: An analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 984-993, February.
    20. Hakam, Dzikri Firmansyah, 2019. "Mitigating the risk of market power abuse in electricity sector restructuring: Evidence from Indonesia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 181-191.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:40:y:2008:i:6:p:1347-1369. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.